How can Nadal be a GOAT candidate if...

...he lost every match he ever played against his greatest rival Federer at every World Tour Finals meeting since 2006? They met 4 times and Nadal lost all 4, having only won 1 set.:shock:
Doesn't a GOAT candidate have to show at least SOME skill indoors as opposed to just winning all clay all the time and having never successfully defended a non-clay title in his entire 10+ years on the tour? Furthermore, only having won 5 hardcourt Masters titles and 4 non-clay Slams? And getting blasted off the court by his main rival in every indoors meeting? :-?
Obviously Nadal wants more clay tournaments. Why no demand for INDOOR tournaments? :lol: Oh yeah, I know why...
A little hard on the knees mixed with the fact that he has no game to compete with Federer indoors so why bother eh? :lol:

...he lost every match he ever played against his greatest rival Federer at every World Tour Finals meeting since 2006? They met 4 times and Nadal lost all 4, having only won 1 set.:shock:
Doesn't a GOAT candidate have to show at least SOME skill indoors as opposed to just winning all clay all the time and having never successfully defended a non-clay title in his entire 10+ years on the tour? Furthermore, only having won 5 hardcourt Masters titles and 4 non-clay Slams? And getting blasted off the court by his main rival in every indoors meeting? :-?
Obviously Nadal wants more clay tournaments. Why no demand for INDOOR tournaments? :lol: Oh yeah, I know why...
A little hard on the knees mixed with the fact that he has no game to compete with Federer indoors so why bother eh? :lol:

Click to expand...

Well, as we all know, Nadal can't play tennis. Here we are: the Goat (swiss cheese) is mentally challenged and has never found the solution to constantly beat an inapt tennis player in slams. In the process, he gave that inapt tennis player the opportunity to become one of the best of all time. Poor tennis fans, that idiot named Roger Federer made so much damage. He completely ruined the game.

...he lost every match he ever played against his greatest rival Federer at every World Tour Finals meeting since 2006? They met 4 times and Nadal lost all 4, having only won 1 set.:shock:
Doesn't a GOAT candidate have to show at least SOME skill indoors as opposed to just winning all clay all the time and having never successfully defended a non-clay title in his entire 10+ years on the tour? Furthermore, only having won 5 hardcourt Masters titles and 4 non-clay Slams? And getting blasted off the court by his main rival in every indoors meeting?
Obviously Nadal wants more clay tournaments. Why no demand for INDOOR tournaments? :lol: Oh yeah, I know why...
A little hard on the knees mixed with the fact that he has no game to compete with Federer indoors so why bother eh? :lol:

Click to expand...

:cryon't give up Mike, you'll find a job soon. Try to get more letters of recommendation from professionals and former professors etc. Strengthen your application letter and update your CV. When you go to job interviews, don't forget to take a shower beforehand, brush your teeth, get a haircut. Finally, make them want you by telling them positive aspects about yourself that set you apart from other candidates. Don't give up, your time will come!

:cryon't give up Mike, you'll find a job soon. Try to get more letters of recommendation from professionals and former professors etc. Strengthen your application letter and update your CV. When you go to job interviews, don't forget to take a shower beforehand, brush your teeth, get a haircut. Finally, make them want you by telling them positive aspects about yourself that set you apart from other candidates. Don't give up, your time will come!

:cryon't give up Mike, you'll find a job soon. Try to get more letters of recommendation from professionals and former professors etc. Strengthen your application letter and update your CV. When you go to job interviews, don't forget to take a shower beforehand, brush your teeth, get a haircut. Finally, make them want you by telling them positive aspects about yourself that set you apart from other candidates. Don't give up, your time will come!

More importantly Nadal needs more years at #1. He is rivaled by Djokovic and Hewitt in that category now, and in weeks as well. And having zero WTF titles looks pretty weak no matter how long he can milk a weak clay era and rack up 70% of his slams at a single event.

:cryon't give up Mike, you'll find a job soon. Try to get more letters of recommendation from professionals and former professors etc. Strengthen your application letter and update your CV. When you go to job interviews, don't forget to take a shower beforehand, brush your teeth, get a haircut. Finally, make them want you by telling them positive aspects about yourself that set you apart from other candidates. Don't give up, your time will come!

Click to expand...

Pure gold lol. I noticed you did not ask Mike Sam to work on his public speaking skills. Do you think he has that covered? Or is that phase 2 of recovery?

:cryon't give up Mike, you'll find a job soon. Try to get more letters of recommendation from professionals and former professors etc. Strengthen your application letter and update your CV. When you go to job interviews, don't forget to take a shower beforehand, brush your teeth, get a haircut. Finally, make them want you by telling them positive aspects about yourself that set you apart from other candidates. Don't give up, your time will come!

Click to expand...

Don't worry about me, Champ. :lol: We're all free to discuss the sport we enjoy. No need to get cute.

My best thread yet is the "Is Nadal a transitional champion?"
That really had the place going :lol:

Nah, I'm just having fun. I personally rate Nadal highly. Definitely the best clay courter ever. Just haven't been happy with the homogenization of surfaces not to mention all the excuses that go around with every loss with these top players. I personally think Nadal would never bring up anything about his knees if he had beaten Rosol. Only in losses do they have excuses. Most players are playing injured, that much we know.

Nadal isnt the GOAT at this point but your reasoning is stupid. Federer is 0-5 vs Nadal at the French Open which is alot bigger event than the WTF which isnt even a slam. Federer is even 0-2 vs Nadal at the Australian Open as well. By your logic Federer could never be the GOAT either.

Nadal isnt the GOAT at this point but your reasoning is stupid. Federer is 0-5 vs Nadal at the French Open which is alot bigger event than the WTF which isnt even a slam. Federer is even 0-2 vs Nadal at the Australian Open as well. By your logic Federer could never be the GOAT either.

Federer might be the greatest of all time, yes, but this list is sensationalist tripe and I don't see why anybody would use it to bolster the claim that Federer is the greatest. I don't know about a serious tennis historian that would rank Gonzales below players like Emerson, or Emerson at 11 when he wasn't even in the top 5 (maybe not even top 8 ) of his own era.

There's a difference -- a huge one -- between journalist and historian. It doesn't matter how "expertly" these guys are, if they have little knowledge of half the guys they are ranking.

Federer might be the greatest of all time, yes, but this list is sensationalist tripe and I don't see why anybody would use it to bolster the claim that Federer is the greatest. I don't know about a serious tennis historian that would rank Gonzales below players like Emerson, or Emerson at 11 when he wasn't even in the top 5 (maybe not even top 8 ) of his own era.

There's a difference -- a huge one -- between journalist and historian. It doesn't matter how "expertly" these guys are, if they have little knowledge of half the guys they are ranking.

Click to expand...

Exactly. Given such absurdities of the list as Emerson being at 11 and Gonzales being at only 22 I would love to see a list of this supposed group of experts, historians, former players, etc....It wouldnt surprise me if the list included people like Jon Wertheim, Luke Jensen, Mary Carillo, Peter Bodo, Ted Robinson, Bill Mcatee, and ex greats who have are well known to have fried their brains with excessive and dangerous high drug use since their playing days- Borg and Wilander.

And calling the 2006 field pathetic compared to Laver's year is a joke.

Click to expand...

LOL you have to be kidding me. 1969 had Laver, Rosewall, Newcombe, Emerson, Smith, Ashe, aging Gonzales. It was probably the deepest field in history, just look at Laver's draws to his Grand Slam. The 2006 field is WAY weaker than that. Federer faced Nadal who was only a clay courter back then, Roddick, Ljubicic, Davydenko, and Blake. Blake was the year end #4 that year, and wasnt Davydenko year end #3.

LOL you have to be kidding me. 1969 had Laver, Rosewall, Newcombe, Emerson, Smith, Ashe, aging Gonzales. It was probably the deepest field in history, just look at Laver's draws to his Grand Slam. The 2006 field is WAY weaker than that. Federer faced Nadal who was only a clay courter back then, Roddick, Ljubicic, Davydenko, and Blake. Blake was the year end #4 that year.

Click to expand...

Like I said, the game is a lot more professional now. The general standard of play is now higher.

Like I said, the game is a lot more professional now. The general standard of play is now higher.

Click to expand...

You are entitled your opinion but in the context of their own times which is all we can compare the 69 field was way tougher than the 2006 field. The 2006 field was basically the midst of another brief transition era with Safin and Hewitt DONE, and I mean 110% done as any kind of contender, Roddick on decline and never consistently at his 2003-2005 level ever again and barely a slam contender anymore, Ferrero and Coria long done, Agassi retiring, and Djokovic and Murray nobodies on the scene at that point, Nadal still only a clay courter despite his at that point fluke Wimbledon final (Robby Kendrick a qualifier should have beaten him in straight sets at Wimbledon that year). The 1969 field has atleast 5 players who rate in the top 25 players of all time today. Blake and Davydenko were the 3rd and 4th best players in the World in 2006. There simply is no comaprision.

And it's not Federer's fault Laver was banned from playing Grand Slams for the most of his prime. See, I can do it too.

And calling the 2006 field pathetic compared to Laver's year is a joke. Players now are way more athletic and professional than back then.

Click to expand...

you said it, the fact that Laver was deprievd from playing the traditional slam events during his prime years (1963-1967) avoided him doubling his records at traditional majors.That is why we have to consider pro majors, with the pro fields being pretty much tougher than amateurs.

LOL you have to be kidding me. 1969 had Laver, Rosewall, Newcombe, Emerson, Smith, Ashe, aging Gonzales. It was probably the deepest field in history, just look at Laver's draws to his Grand Slam. The 2006 field is WAY weaker than that. Federer faced Nadal who was only a clay courter back then, Roddick, Ljubicic, Davydenko, and Blake. Blake was the year end #4 that year, and wasnt Davydenko year end #3.

Click to expand...

That´s it.To have Davydenko and Blake as the 3 rd and 4 th best player, just says it all.